Alterego Posted July 6, 2012 Report Share Posted July 6, 2012 [quote name='Caliph' timestamp='1341602907' post='3004986'] FAN and TOP and GOONS (Neutral Shoving) were not handled easily. FAN took the entire Initiative to aid bomb NPO to keep them affloat and yet they acted as if they had FAN on their own. If the WUT had stayed out FAN would have destroyed NPO then. It took a coalition to take FAN out the first time. It took a coalition collapsing around GOONS and leaving GOONS as one of the only alliances holding off a huge coalition by themselves to be taken out. It wasn't easy forming and maintaining that coalition, they weren't easily handled. It took almost the whole of everyones upper tiers to take out TOP. It took most every top heavy alliance here, plus others random 1-2 upper tier nations to "handle" TOP. And even then that war could have gone on longer than that if they had decided to keep fighting. TOP wasn't "easily handled". Regarding NPO, well you were right there. Not saying NPO was a paper tiger but hiding upper tier in PM severely limited their damage output and came across as abandoning all who couldn't get into PM. NPO limited the amount of forces they could attack with, and in doing so became very easy to handle. NPO was a huge nut to crack, but definately not as hard as the others listed here. If you think handling TOP was easy, why not put some work in and try to handle us? [/quote] Ok, managed Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
King Chill I Posted July 6, 2012 Report Share Posted July 6, 2012 (edited) [quote name='Brehon' timestamp='1341602250' post='3004973'] Or wait... just not throw poop to begin with. What are we monkeys now and we are not responsible or accountable for throwing poop just to see where it lands. [/quote] I feel like i should tell you that we have a whole poop dedicated section in our forums. Plus all these years allied to MK, a few poop flinging techniques have rubbed off. We are just considerate enough to keep it all in the house unless someone is cutting into our tech supply or the even more rare target supply. Edited July 6, 2012 by King Chill I Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lurunin Posted July 6, 2012 Report Share Posted July 6, 2012 [quote name='Brehon' timestamp='1341602485' post='3004976'] Indeed, because throwing the poop is perfectly acceptable right? Edit: Its alright, I expect nothing greater than what I have seen here. [/quote] Just remember this is the lot you threw your cards with and became apart of the same coalition. Like or hate it you are essentially propping them up whether you are only defending NG or not. It also shows that you are going back on your word to defend allies who are attacked seeing as what? 4 NATO nations have been hit by umbrella out of the blue? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IYIyTh Posted July 6, 2012 Report Share Posted July 6, 2012 You're all full of something. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flak attack Posted July 6, 2012 Report Share Posted July 6, 2012 [quote name='Lurunin' timestamp='1341614160' post='3005150'] Just remember this is the lot you threw your cards with and became apart of the same coalition. Like or hate it you are essentially propping them up whether you are only defending NG or not. It also shows that you are going back on your word to defend allies who are attacked seeing as what? 4 NATO nations have been hit by umbrella out of the blue? [/quote] "out of the blue" Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
berbers Posted July 6, 2012 Report Share Posted July 6, 2012 [quote name='Lurunin' timestamp='1341614160' post='3005150'] It also shows that you are going back on your word to defend allies who are attacked seeing as what? 4 NATO nations have been hit by umbrella out of the blue? [/quote] By this logic, NATO should have hit VE when they hit NPO. Because NPO got countered first and all that. Seems ridiculous when you look at it... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lurunin Posted July 7, 2012 Report Share Posted July 7, 2012 [quote name='berbers' timestamp='1341617483' post='3005240'] By this logic, NATO should have hit VE when they hit NPO. Because NPO got countered first and all that. Seems ridiculous when you look at it... [/quote] unfortunately NATO didn't make an announcement that they would defend any and all allies from attack though did they? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
berbers Posted July 7, 2012 Report Share Posted July 7, 2012 [quote name='Lurunin' timestamp='1341619408' post='3005281'] unfortunately NATO didn't make an announcement that they would defend any and all allies from attack though did they? [/quote] It's implied when you sign a treaty... The logic you are using doesn't work. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lurunin Posted July 7, 2012 Report Share Posted July 7, 2012 (edited) [quote name='berbers' timestamp='1341619568' post='3005285'] It's implied when you sign a treaty... The logic you are using doesn't work. [/quote] hm...let me back up a bit then... Pacifica is a very large alliance with very strong ties... Nato is a decent sized alliance (in comparison) with some pretty good ties... NATO is at war with MK (i do believe?) with over 100wars. Pacifica is at war with almost 200 wars but 3x the membership of NATO and are fighting GOD/VE Pacifica are more able to divert half their alliance to a different front at ease than NATO would be while not sacrificing their war ability on those they are already engaged with. True/False? esit: also with making a clarification announcement like Pacifica did they opened themselves up for the possibility of more than one ally needing help. While it's doubtful they will pull an RIA and fight both sides of a war it does show that they won't commit to their own foreign policy that they went out of their way to announce to the world Edited July 7, 2012 by Lurunin Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
berbers Posted July 7, 2012 Report Share Posted July 7, 2012 [quote name='Lurunin' timestamp='1341619920' post='3005292'] hm...let me back up a bit then... Pacifica is a very large alliance with very strong ties... Nato is a decent sized alliance (in comparison) with some pretty good ties... NATO is at war with MK (i do believe?) with over 100wars. Pacifica is at war with almost 200 wars but 3x the membership of NATO and are fighting GOD/VE Pacifica are more able to divert half their alliance to a different front at ease than NATO would be while not sacrificing their war ability on those they are already engaged with. True/False? esit: also with making a clarification announcement like Pacifica did they opened themselves up for the possibility of more than one ally needing help. While it's doubtful they will pull an RIA and fight both sides of a war it does show that they won't commit to their own foreign policy that they went out of their way to announce to the world [/quote] You are implying NATO needs help, once we finish off MK and Umbrella, we plan on entering in defense of NPO. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tick1 Posted July 7, 2012 Report Share Posted July 7, 2012 [quote name='berbers' timestamp='1341621557' post='3005320'] You are implying NATO needs help, once we finish off MK and Umbrella, we plan on entering in defense of NPO. [/quote] I see your poop, and raise you five poop Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
berbers Posted July 7, 2012 Report Share Posted July 7, 2012 [quote name='Tick1' timestamp='1341622246' post='3005326'] I see your poop, and raise you five poop [/quote] I just realized I was arguing with ignorance, so I figured I would resort to some myself. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Drai Posted July 7, 2012 Report Share Posted July 7, 2012 [quote name='berbers' timestamp='1341621557' post='3005320'] You are implying NATO needs help, once we finish off MK and Umbrella, we plan on entering in defense of NPO. [/quote] I think NPO would prefer your help this war. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
berbers Posted July 7, 2012 Report Share Posted July 7, 2012 [quote name='Drai' timestamp='1341623449' post='3005343'] I think NPO would prefer your help this war. [/quote] I'm not picking up what you are laying down, it may be due to the hour, but could you elaborate? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Colonel Herzog Posted July 7, 2012 Report Share Posted July 7, 2012 (edited) [quote name='berbers' timestamp='1341621557' post='3005320'] You are implying NATO needs help, once we finish off MK and Umbrella, we plan on entering in defense of NPO. [/quote] Heh. Don't come too quickly. War is no fun when ALL your enemies have been ZIed by NATO. Edited July 7, 2012 by Colonel Herzog Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.